linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] rtc: da9063: Fix ALARM interrupt registration.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <6ED8E3B22081A4459DAC7699F3695FB7D0B49E1F@SW-EX-MBX02.diasemi.com>
Date:	Fri, 21 Nov 2014 13:23:44 +0000
From:	"Opensource [Steve Twiss]" <stwiss.opensource@...semi.com>
To:	Dmitry Lavnikevich <D.Lavnikevich@...-solutions.com>
CC:	Support Opensource <Support.Opensource@...semi.com>,
	"a.zummo@...ertech.it" <a.zummo@...ertech.it>,
	"rtc-linux@...glegroups.com" <rtc-linux@...glegroups.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] rtc: da9063: Fix ALARM interrupt registration.



On 21 November 2014 12:04 Dmitry Lavnikevich wrote: 

> > On 20Nov, 2014, at 15:43, Steve Twiss wrote:
> > On 20 November 2014 13:09 Dmitry Lavnikevich wrote:
> > [...]
> >>>
> >>> da9063-rtc da9063-rtc: Failed to request ALARM IRQ -22: -22
> >>> da9063-rtc: probe of da9063-rtc failed with error -22
> >>
> >> I have tested this patch on pfla02 board and it was ok. On which
> >> board this fail occurred?
> >
> > I am using a MCIMX6DL-SDP board -- although I the differences are in
> > my code base and not the platform in this case.
> > My apologies
> >
> > Regards,
> > Steve
> >
> > patch follows:
> […]
> 
> I see that your code also fixes the issue. And it is more consistent with
> da9055 implementation.
> So there is no need for my fix if yours is already there. Is it already accepted
> on some mainline branch?

Hi Dmitry,

No, unfortunately -- I have not had time to send it to the kernel -- it has been
in my buffer for a long time

> If not then are you going to submit it soon?

If you want to submit this, then I will support with Ack: and Tested-by:
but probably it will be quicker not to wait for me.

Regards,
Stephen